Honestly, I feel quite these charts are not as objective as they are made out to be, being really inconsistent between each other.
This may sound a bit ranty, but if these charts are meant to display every character that may be feasibly considered, I feel any bias should be excluded.
On one hand, not a
single Zelda series newcomer is included as most characters are deemed "too minuscule in the overall Zelda timeline". On the other hand, the Kirby chart is bloated with characters like Daroach, Taranza (who is misspelled, btw) and Adeleine, whose appearances can be counted on a single hand. Reading AEMehr's response it seems these Kirby characters are only included as they're dream friends, but that makes me wonder: what's the difference between being a Dream Friend and a playable status in Hyrule Warriors?
I'm wondering how Pauline, a recurring spin-off character (who
finally got an appearance in the main series in Oddysey), appears on there, yet characters like Fire Emblem's Anna, who has had similar recurring smaller roles until being upgraded in a later entry (being the spin-off Heroes for Anna, where she supposedly has a large role in the story) are excluded. If you're going to include these kind of side characters, be consistent between series.
Then, in the Pokémon chart, Bewear and Golisopod are on there for some reason. What is the reasoning behind those two?
As far as I'm aware, Bewear's only merit is his appearance in the anime - though other characters who have a prominent role in the anime don't appear on the charts. For example Rowlet, who both has a prominent role
and was voted
the most popular Sun/Moon Pokémon in Japan, doesn't appear on there. (Keep in mind Sakurai tries to add popular characters. (Also note Decidueye does not appear in the top 14 while the other final starter evolutions do, that aside.))
Golisopod is shown with Guzma, so I guess it being Guzma's ace is the reason for including it in the chart? There is no precedent for character ace Pokémon appearing. And if we're including characters that are important in the story we may as well include picks like Buzzwole and Tapu Koko.
Despite having a very vocal and active fanbase, Isaac is excluded due to timing and his series being irrelevant, as the last entry dates 2010. Yet Banjo, who is in a very similar boat (having a very vocal fanbase despite the last entry dating 2008), is. Granted, Banjo's game sold double the amount of Isaac's, but at 1,78 mil Golden Sun is no slouch either. Isaac's exclusion from Smash 4 is not a positive sign, though his appearance in Brawl does signal Sakurai is aware of his existence.
Finally, AEMehr mentioned the following: "Retro characters are weird to guess but I guess Startropics has a devoted enough cult following to consider."
What is the cutoff for a retro character? There's three consoles, or 16 years, between Ice Climber and Melee. Would you consider any character that appeared in a Gamecube game, or dates 2002 or earlier, to be a retro character?
As a note, I don't really hope for any character mentioned in this post, but again: if these charts are meant to be used for objective discussion they should be without any bias.
I really do feel Chibi-Robo should be on there.